Cover not available

In:Crossroads Semantics: Computation, experiment and grammar
Edited by Hilke Reckman, Lisa Lai-Shen Cheng, Maarten Hijzelendoorn and Rint Sybesma
[Not in series 210] 2017
► pp. 155–176

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 10
Prosody of restrictive and appositive relative clauses in Dutch and German

 | University of Pannonia, Hungary | Leiden University, The Netherlands
 | Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy
Published online: 12 April 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.210.10van
Abstract
Restrictive and appositive relative clauses differ in their meaning and structure. The first restrict the class to which the antecedent refers, whereas the latter denote additional information on the antecedent. In terms of structure, this difference concerns the relation between antecedent and relative clause, which is either narrow (restrictives) or loose (appositives). How these relations are encoded in prosody is the topic of investigation. Although there is considerable agreement on what prosodic cues distinguish restrictives and appositives across languages, claims mainly come from prescriptive literature. The current study investigates the structure-prosody interface experimentally by means of perception tests for Dutch and German. Results indicate that these languages differ in how prosody signals structural cohesion or breaking.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Structure-prosody
    • 1.2Prosody of RRC and ARC
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Stimuli
    • 2.2Procedure
    • 2.3Statistical analysis
  • 3.Results
  • 4.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (35)
References
Adriaens, Leon M. H. 1991. Ein Modell Deutscher Intonation. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auran, Cyril & Rudy Loock. 2006. Appositive relative clauses and their prosodic realization in spoken discourse: A corpus study of phonetic aspects in British English. In Candy Sidner, John Harpur, Anton Benz & Peter Kühnlein (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Constraints in Discourse, 117–124.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina. 2002. Headed relatives in generative syntax – Part 2. Glot International 6. 1–13.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Birkner, Karin. 2008. Relativ(satz)konstruktionen im gesprochenen Deutsch. Syntaktische, prosodische, semantische und pragmatische Aspekte. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, Paul & David Weenink. 2008. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.43). [URL].
Brandt, Margareta. 1990. Weiterführende Nebensätze. Zu ihrer Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Aoju. 2007. Language-specificity in the perception of continuation intonation. In Carlos Gussenhoven & Tomas Riad (eds.), Tones and tunes II: Phonetic and behavioural studies in word and sentence prosody, 107–142. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cooper, William E. & Jeanne Paccia-Cooper. 1980. Syntax and speech. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dirksen, Arthur & Ludmila Menert. 1999. Fluency Speech Editor (Version 1.3). Utrecht: Fluency Speech Technology. [URL].
Emmonds, Joseph E. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fon, Yee-Jean J. 2002. A cross-linguistic study on syntactic and discourse boundary cues in spontaneous speech. Columbus OH: Ohio State University dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garro, Luisa & Frank Parker. 1982. Some suprasegmental characteristics of relative clauses in English. Journal of Phonetics 10. 149–161.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grabe, Esther. 1998. Comparative intonational phonology: English and German. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos, Toni Rietveld, Joop Kerkhoff & Jacques Terken. 2003. ToDI: Transcription of Dutch Intonation. [URL].
Haan, Judith. 2001. Speaking of questions. An exploration of Dutch question intonation (LOT dissertation series 52). Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hart, Johan ’t, René Collier & Antonie Cohen. 1990. A perceptual study of intonation, an experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirst, Daniel. 1993. Peak, boundary and cohesion characteristics of prosodic grouping. Working Papers of Lund University 41. 32–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holler, Anke. 2005. Weiterführende Relativsätze. Empirische und theoretische Aspekte. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kager, René. 1988. Plaatsing van zinsaccenten en pauzes in spraak [Location of sentence accents and pauses in speech]. In Marcel P. R. van den Broecke (ed.), Ter sprake: Spraak als betekenisvol geluid in 36 hoofdstukken, 416–427. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaland, Constantijn C. L. & Vincent J. van Heuven. 2010. The structure-prosody interface of restrictive and appositive relative clauses in Dutch and German. Chicago IL: Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2010 100064, 1–4.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kan, Seda. 2009. Prosodic domains and the syntax-prosody mapping in Turkish. Bebek/Istanbul: Boğaziçi University MA Thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1984. Der Relativsatz. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moulines, Eric & Werner Verhelst. 1995. Time-domain and frequency-domain techniques for prosodic modification of speech. In W. Bastiaan Kleijn & Kuldip K. Paliwal (eds.), Speech coding and synthesis, 519–555. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neijt, Anneke. 1991. Universele fonologie. Een inleiding in de klankleer [Universal phonology. An introduction to sound structure]. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel. 1985. Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nooteboom, Sibout G., Brokx, Jan P. L. & Jacobus J. de Rooij. 1978. Contributions of prosody to speech perception. In Willem J. M. Levelt & Giovanni B. Flores d’Arcais (eds.), Studies in the perception of language, 75–107. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2003. The logic of conventional implicatures. Los Angeles CA: University of California Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rialland, Annie. 2007. Question prosody: an African perspective. In Carlos Gussenhoven & Tomas Riad (eds.), Tunes and Tones, Volume 1: Typological studies in word and sentence prosody, 35–62. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rijpma, Enneus. & Schuringa, Frans G. 1972. Nederlandse spraakkunst. (24th ed.). Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rooij, Jacobus J. de. 1979. Speech punctuation. Utrecht: Utrecht University dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaffranietz, Brigitte. 1999. Relativsätze in aufgabenorientierten Dialogen: Funktionale Aspekte ihrer Prosodie und Pragmatik in Sprachproduktion und Sprachrezeption. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schubö, Fabian, Anna Roth, Viviana Haase & Caroline Féry. 2015. Experimental investigations on the prosodic realization of restrictive and appositive relative clauses in German. Lingua 154. 65–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 2005. Comments on Intonational Phrasing in English. In Sonia Frota, Marina Vigario & M. João Freitas (eds.), Prosodies: Selected papers from the Phonetics and Phonology in Iberia Conference 2003, 11–58. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 2005. A short report on intonation phrase boundaries in German. Linguistische Berichte 203. 273–296.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vries, Mark de. 2000. Appositive relative clauses. In Helen de Hoop & Ton van der Wouden (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2000 (Linguistics in the Netherlands 17), 221–231. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue